The American Civil Liberties Union filed a federal lawsuit on Monday against the US Social Security Administration (SSA) and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). In its lawsuit, the ACLU accuses the agencies of violating the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by ignoring the ACLU’s requests and subsequent appeals for information concerning the so-called Department of Government Efficiency’s (DOGE) “attempted or actual access” to sensitive federal databases.

The ACLU began pursuing documents under the federal transparency law in February, as WIRED first reported, responding to reports that Elon Musk’s DOGE operatives were seeking access to troves of personal information belonging to US citizens, including US Department of Treasury records that contain “millions of Social Security numbers, bank accounts, business finances,” and more.

Over the last few months, extensive reporting by WIRED and other outlets has exposed DOGE’s attempts to access and analyze sensitive data on federal employees, the American public, and immigrants to the US.

In its complaint, the ACLU argues that DOGE’s access to highly sensitive information about Americans’ health and finances raises “acute concerns” due to the “extraordinary harm” that can result from any unauthorized use of those files. According to the complaint, the ACLU pressed the SSA to expedite the release of public records associated with DOGE’s work; a process permitted when documents are deemed urgent to inform the public about government activities at the center of significant public debate or concern. The organization cited, among its other materials, a letter from Senator Mark Warner detailing the unprecedented secrecy shrouding DOGE’s activities.

The SSA rejected the ACLU’s claim but then later ignored its attempts to file an appeal, the ACLU says—a procedure the SSA is required to abide by under FOIA. The VA was even less responsive, the ACLU alleges; it acknowledged the ACLU’s request in February then ceased any further communications.

“If DOGE is forcing its way into our private data, it is forcing itself into our private lives,” says Lauren Yu, one of the attorneys representing the ACLU in court. “Congress mandated strict privacy safeguards for a reason, and Americans deserve to know who has access to their social security numbers, their bank account information, and their health records … Government actors cannot continue to shroud themselves in secrecy while prying into our most sensitive records.”

The organization’s lawsuit is also informed, it says, by growing public concern over the ongoing push by DOGE to implement artificial intelligence (AI) systems, “which raises alarms about the potential for mass surveillance and politically motivated misuse of that deeply personal information.”

Earlier this month, WIRED reported that a DOGE operative was attempting to use an AI tool to implement code at the VA, which administers benefits to roughly 10 million American veterans and their families, including health care and disability payments. Sources at the agency voiced concerns about the rush to implement AI, saying the operation had failed to follow normal procedures and threatened to put US veterans’ access to the benefits they’d earned at risk.

“Granting DOGE access to VA data systems would not only violate federal law but it would undermine the very core of the VA mission to care for veterans, their families, caregivers, and survivors,” Michelle Fraling, the ACLU’s counsel, said in a statement.

WIRED reported last week that DOGE is knitting together data from the Social Security Administration, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Internal Revenue Service that could create a surveillance tool of unprecedented scope. The ACLU’s initial records requests were prompted in part by concerns, its FOIA filings say, about the use of computer matching programs that are able to cross-reference information on individuals using disparate government databases.

The ability of the government to cross-reference personal information using databases from different agencies is tightly regulated under the US Privacy Act. The act was amended in 1988 to require agencies to enter into written agreements before engaging in computer matching, and agencies are required under the law to calculate how such initiatives might impact individuals’ rights.

“The federal government cannot dodge accountability by ignoring our lawful demands for transparency,” Nathan Freed Wessler, deputy director of the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, said in a statement.